The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the core holdings of an Appellate Division decision as to who may attend a defense medical examination and whether it may be recorded, but the high court declined to place the burden on the plaintiff to show special reasons as to why third-party observation or recording should be permitted in each case.

The underlying cases were three personal injury actions, consolidated by the Appellate Division, which all required the plaintiffs to submit a defense medical examination. In two cases, the DME’s were neuropsychological exams and the third required an orthopedic exam. All three plaintiffs had cognitive limitations, psychological impairments or language barriers and sought to have the examinations recorded or to be accompanied by a third-party observer, according to the June 15 opinion.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]